Weather Acting Funny in Your Neighbourhood?

[tandfman]

My point is, IMO, the doomsday scenario is overdone and, at least partially, driven by personal and political agendas.

Undoubtedly. But the same is true of the "everything is ok--there's nothing amiss" scenario. It's a lamentable fact of life that important scientific issues have become polticized. That should never happen, but it does happen regularly these days.

[MJD]

More reality. A bit too much of a good thing. Have driven in this nonsense before-not this time. Run will be fun:


/O.CON.KBUF.LE.W.0007.070204T0000Z- 070205T1100Z/ /O.CON.KBUF.WC.Y. 0002.070204T0300Z-070205T1500Z/ CHAUTAUQUA-CATTARAUGUS-ALLEGANY- INCLUDING THE CITIES OF...JAMESTOWN... OLEAN...WELLSVILLE 645 AM EST SAT FEB 3 2007

...LAKE EFFECT SNOW WARNING REMAINS IN EFFECT FROM 7 PM THIS EVENING TO 6 AM EST MONDAY... ...WIND CHILL ADVISORY REMAINS IN EFFECT FROM 10 PM THIS EVENING TO 10 AM EST MONDAY...

A LAKE EFFECT SNOW WARNING REMAINS IN EFFECT FROM 7 PM THIS EVENING TO 6 AM EST MONDAY. A WIND CHILL ADVISORY REMAINS IN EFFECT FROM 10 PM THIS EVENING TO 10 AM EST MONDAY.

LAKE EFFECT SNOWS HAVE LIFTED NORTH OUT OF THE AREA THIS MORNING... THEREFORE THE LAKE EFFECT SNOW ADVISORY FOR THIS MORNING HAS BEEN CANCELLED.

THE REGION WILL GET A RESPITE FROM LAKE SNOWS TODAY. HOWEVER...A SECOND COLD FRONT WILL CROSS THE REGION THIS EVENING WITH A BURST OF SNOW...THEN THE FOLLOWING WESTERLY FLOW WILL AGAIN PRODUCE HEAVY LAKE SNOWS ACROSS THE REGION TONIGHT THROUGH MONDAY MORNING. TOTAL ACCUMULATIONS OF UP TO TWO FEET OF ADDITIONAL SNOW ARE POSSIBLE SATURDAY NIGHT THROUGH SUNDAY NIGHT.

STRONG WESTERLY WINDS OF 15 TO 25 MPH WILL COMBINE WITH TEMPERATURES IN THE SINGLE DIGITS TO CREATE WIND CHILL VALUES IN THE 15 TO 25 BELOW RANGE LATER TONIGHT AND SUNDAY.

IN LAKE EFFECT SNOW THE WEATHER CAN VARY FROM LOCALLY HEAVY SNOW IN NARROW BANDS TO CLEAR SKIES JUST A FEW MILES AWAY. IF YOU WILL BE TRAVELING ACROSS THE REGION BE PREPARED FOR RAPID CHANGES IN ROAD AND VISIBILITY CONDITIONS.

[cullman]

We're getting a break from thinking about global warming ATTS (and that there stuff) for the next week or two up here in the PNW.

"Judith Lavoie, CanWest News Service
Published: Friday, February 02, 2007

VICTORIA — Scientists are warning that if B.C.’s south coast is going to be hit by an earthquake soon, it’s likely to happen during the next week."

http://www.canada.com/topics/news/natio ... 40&k=92513

cman

[Mennisco]

We're in a nice box up here in Toronto.

[dukehjsteve]

Down here in balmy Indianapolis, it is 4 below. Hope they give the Colts' players heavy jackets before the Victory Parade this afternoon.

[figo]

i'm looking around for actual data on global warming.. direct data, no spins, no conclusions, raw data.
stuff like an average temperature now of say 500 weather stations versus historical averages, say from the last 100 years.
can't find it googling... you'd think this kind of data would be readily available ???
or sea levels around the world, averages of 200 ports....
or crop yields, growing seasons length world wide,....
or ocean temperature averages...
a list of all glaciers advancing - receding, snowfall accumulations and such.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...101202498.html

my haphazard study indicates that the north is seemingly warming quite a bit as compared to the last 30-50 years but also the southern hemisphere is cooling by a bit.... i'm wondering if the earth averages are taken mostly from the north creating a bias, you'd like to balance north and south readings.. equal amounts of stations by longitude and latitude, geographic location (inland - sea).

for the north, you'd like to account for thermal warming of the arctic ocean caused by under water volcanoes, has this activity increased these last few years, accounting for the entire global warming effect??? according to the literature, there is virtually no historical data as most of the thermal contribution from volcanoes was uncovered in the last few years.... at least monitoring can start now in earnest, they should put some of their global warming dollars into research in this area...

or how about solar cycles - more / less radiation, what portion of the warming equation does the sun (output) account for.?? for sure solar activity varies a lot when it comes to solar storms (sunspots) and more energetic radiation output (uv, xray, high energy solar wind - particles coming earths way....


sunspot data - uv solar output equivalent?
note in the lows of the 1600's correspond very well with a little ice age, and the 1950's + corresponding now with a longer term warming effect????????



ideally, the global warmers would post all of this data on a single website.....
spend some global warmer government dollars there.
don't you think? or maybe it's out there already?

anyone find sources for raw data?

[Mennisco]

I can't look for raw data right now but for heaven's sake if 2500 scientists under the auspices of the UN have now declared that the data shows unequivocally that we are ruining our climate, when does this silly debate stop?

[MJD]

I think I heard someone say that they said it was actually 95% so there is a bit of wiggle room there.

[tandfman]

A 95% likelihood that we're ruining the planet's climate should be enough to concern us. They're clearly not talking about a remote worst case scenario. It's as close as we're going to get to reality, and I agree with Mennisco and others who think that it's time to stop debating whether it's happening and it's time to start focusing all of our efforts on what the heck we're going to do about it.

[Mennisco]

I think I heard someone say that they said it was actaully 95% so there is a bit of wiggle room there.

Spoken like a true actuary :wink:

How many honey bees can do the Waggle Dance while shitfaced on Waggledance in the middle of a ferocious typhoon named Waggarina? :shock:

http://beergeek.stores.yahoo.net/yowahoal20.html

[MJD]

I am not saying I disagree. I was just surprised at the 95%. The eco extremists talk about a virtual certainty and, as usual, it is the extremists that always hurt your case. To a mathematician, there is a big difference between virtual certainty and 95%.

[Mennisco]

I am not saying I disagree. I was just surprised at the 95%. The eco extremists talk about a virtual certainty and, as usual, it is the extremists that always hurt your case. To a mathematician, there is a big difference between virtual certainty and 95%.

True, and then I am also reminded of the current "rush hour traffic" warning dished out to BC as she's at 1 in 4000 odds of a catastrophic quake as we spake. It's more of an odds game than anything requiring absolute certainty, which I'd argue we're never gonna get anyway - problems of imperfection in climate models due to uncertainty in some variables for starters.

[SQUACKEE]

Da Ruskies are gonna nuke us.
Over population will be the death us
Some kinda of bug is gonna wipe out the human race
An asteriod could hit at any time wiping out all life.
A mega quake will cause a huge wave to wipe out coastal areas.
Global cooling will send the earth into an iceage
The disappearing rain forest will doom mankind
Nuclear power plants will blowup spreading deadly stuff all over da place
Jehoval witness's say the world will end in 1976
Pesticides are gonna kill us
Trans fatty acids are gonna kill us
second hand smoke is gonna kill us
Terrorist will get nukes and blowup american cities
Many say the world will end in the year 2000
Global warming will ruin our weather in a few decades

Im sick of all this crap. Im not saying it isnt true but im sick of it.

[Daisy]

Im sick of all this crap. Im not saying it isnt true but im sick of it.

I think you mean "I will be dead of it".

[MJD]

Jehoval witness's say the world will end in 1976

And only 100k get in I hear? Doesn't that make recruiting difficult?